Dataset Information

Usefulness of Midline Catheters versus Peripheral Venous Catheters in an Inpatient Unit: A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT: Canalization of vascular accesses is one of the most used techniques in hospitalization units. When talking about peripherally inserted catheters, we can differentiate between peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVC), midline catheters, and long peripheral catheters (LPC). Midline catheters are rarely used despite being recommended for intravenous therapies lasting more than six days. This research is a pilot study of a longitudinal clinical trial. It aims to compare the complications associated with intravenous therapy between the control group (CG) with a PIVC and the experimental group (EG) with a midline in an Internal Medicine Unit of a Spanish hospital for three months. In this study, 44 subjects participated, 25 in the CG and 19 in the EG. The duration of cannulation was longer in the experimental group (8.13 days vs. 3.22, p < 0.001), and the appearance of phlebitis was more significant in the control group (19 patients in CG and 25 patients in EG). Midlines have presented a longer duration of cannulation and fewer complications than the PIVC. This protocol was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05512117).

SUBMITTER: Villalba-Nicolau M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9680301 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Usefulness of Midline Catheters versus Peripheral Venous Catheters in an Inpatient Unit: A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial.

Villalba-Nicolau Marcela M Chover-Sierra Elena E Saus-Ortega Carlos C Ballestar-Tarín Maria Luisa ML Chover-Sierra Pilar P Martínez-Sabater Antonio A

Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) 20221031 4

Canalization of vascular accesses is one of the most used techniques in hospitalization units. When talking about peripherally inserted catheters, we can differentiate between peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVC), midline catheters, and long peripheral catheters (LPC). Midline catheters are rarely used despite being recommended for intravenous therapies lasting more than six days. This research is a pilot study of a longitudinal clinical trial. It aims to compare the complications associated ...[more]

PMID: 36412798

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Peripheral venous catheters (PVCs) require adequate maintenance based on heparin or saline locks in order to prevent complications. Heparin has proven effective in central venous catheters, although its use in PVCs remains controversial. Our hypothesis was that saline locks are as effective as heparin locks in preventing problems with PVCs. The objective of the present study was to compare phlebitis and catheter tip colonization rates between PVCs locked with saline and those locked with heparin in patients admitted to an internal medicine department (IMD). METHODS:We performed a 19-month prospective, controlled, open-label, randomized clinical study of patients with at least 1 PVC admitted to the IMD of our hospital. The patients were randomized to receive saline solution (PosiFlush®, group A) or heparin (Fibrilin®, group B) for daily maintenance of the PVC. Clinical and microbiological data were monitored to investigate the frequency of phlebitis, catheter tip colonization, and catheter-related bloodstream infection (C-RBSI), as well as crude mortality, days of hospital stay, and days of antimicrobial treatment. RESULTS:We assessed 339 PVCs (241 patients), of which 192 (56.6%) were locked with saline (group A) and 147 (43.4%) with heparin (group B). The main demographic characteristics of the patients were distributed equally between the 2 study groups. The median (IQR) catheter days was 5 (3-8) for both groups (p = 0.64). The frequency of phlebitis was 17.7% for group A and 13.3% for group B (p = 0.30). The frequency of colonization of PVC tips was 14.6% and 12.2% in groups A and B, respectively (p = 0.63). Only 2 episodes of C-RBSI were detected (1 patient in group A). Saline lock was not an independent factor for phlebitis or catheter colonization. CONCLUSIONS:Our study revealed no statistically significant differences in the frequency of phlebitis and catheter tip colonization between PVCs locked with saline and PVCs locked with heparin. We suggest that PVC can be maintained with saline solution, as it is safer and cheaper than heparin.

Project description:ImportancePeripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) frequently fail during treatment causing therapy interruption, pain, recatheterization, and additional health care costs. Midline catheters (MCs) may improve functional dwell time and reduce failure compared with traditional PIVCs.ObjectiveTo compare device failure of MCs with PIVCs.Design, setting, and participantsThis was a pragmatic, randomized clinical superiority trial with an embedded internal pilot study conducted from July 2020 to May 2022. The study took place in a quaternary pediatric hospital in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. Inclusion criteria were patients aged 1 to 18 years requiring peripherally compatible intravenous therapy for 4 days or longer.InterventionsPatients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive a PIVC or MC, stratified by age (≤5 years, >5 years). One catheter was studied per patient.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was all-cause device failure, defined as premature cessation of device function. Secondary outcomes included number of insertion attempts, insertion failure, pain (on insertion), procedural time, patient/parent satisfaction (with insertion), device dwell time, device complications during dwell time, additional vascular access devices required to complete treatment, clinician satisfaction (at removal), and health care costs.ResultsOf the 128 patients randomly assigned to study groups, 127 patients (median [IQR] age, 7 [2-13] years; 71 male [56%]) had a device inserted, with 65 (51.2%) in the PIVC group and 62 (48.8%) in the MC group. All patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Device failure was lower in patients in the MC group (10 [16.1%]) compared with those in the PIVC group (30 [46.2%]; odds ratio [OR], 0.22; 95% CI, 0.10-0.52; P <.001). MCs were associated with fewer insertion attempts (mean difference [MD], -0.3; 95% CI, -0.5 to 0; P = .04), increased dwell time (MD, 66.9 hours; 95% CI, 36.2-97.5 hours; P <.001), and fewer patients required additional vascular access devices to complete treatment in the MC group (4 [6.5%]) and PIVC group (19 [29.2%]; OR, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.05-0.52; P = .002). Compared with PIVCs, use of MCs was associated with greater patient (9.0 vs 7.1 of 10; P = .002) and parent (9.1 vs 8.2 of 10; P = .02) satisfaction and lower health care costs (AUS -$151.67 [US -$101.13] per person; 95% credible interval, AUS -$171.45 to -$131.90 [US -$114.20 to -$87.95]).Conclusions and relevanceFindings suggest that MC insertion for patients requiring peripherally compatible intravenous therapy for 4 days or longer should be prioritized to reduce the resource intensive, expensive, and burdensome sequelae of device failure.Trial registrationAustralia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12620000724976.

Project description:ObjectivesA rising incidence of septic shock as well as recommendations for early vasopressor initiation has increased the number of patients eligible for norepinephrine (NE). Traditionally, NE has been administered through central lines, in intensive care units, due to the risk of extravasation in peripheral lines. The aim of the current study is to determine the rate of complications and patient outcomes when NE is administered through midline catheters (MCs) in intermediary care units (IMCUs).DesignRetrospective cohort study.SettingThree IMCUs in southern Sweden PARTICIPANTS: Patients with septic shock who received NE through a MC from September 2020 through March 2023.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe primary outcome was a major complication to treatment, defined as extravasation of NE, catheter-associated venous thromboembolism and catheter-associated bloodstream infection (BSI). Secondary outcomes included patient outcomes after intermediary care (either deceased, discharged to regular ward care or intensive care) and the need for additional central lines.ResultsOf 474 eligible patients, 472 were included, with a median (IQR) age of 73.5 (65-80) years, with 281 (60%) men. The median (IQR) duration of NE infusion was 21 (9-38) hours, with a median (IQR) dosage of 0.12 (0.08-0.20) µg/kg/min. Major complications occurred in 12 cases (2.5%), with one suspected extravasation, seven thromboembolic events and four catheter-related BSIs. After intermediary care, 334 patients (71%) were discharged to regular ward care, 66 patients (14%) were escalated to intensive care and 72 (15%) died in intermediary care, of whom 69 had a documented ceiling of care decision. 100 patients (21%) received a central line.ConclusionNE administration in MCs was associated with a low rate of short-term complications and could decrease the need for central lines. MCs can enable the initial management of circulatory failure outside intensive care, but more studies are needed to determine the long-term value of IMCUs.Trial registration numberNCT06121115.

Project description:Objectives The feasibility of utilizing 4% sodium citrate as an alternative locking solution for central venous catheters (CVCs) (excluding dialysis catheters) was assessed. Methods Using heparin saline and 4% sodium citrate as locking solution, then 152 patients in ICU undergoing infusion with central venous catheters, were randomly assigned to receive either 10 U/mL heparin saline or 4% sodium citrate. The used outcome indicators include: four indexes of blood coagulation at 10 minutes after locking and 7 d after the first locking, bleeding around the puncture site and subcutaneous hematoma rate, gastrointestinal bleeding rate, catheter indwelling time, catheter occlusion rate, catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) rate, rate of ionized calcium < 1.0 mmol/L. The main outcome indicator was the activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) at 10 min after tube locking. The trial was approved by relevant authorities (Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, no: ChiCTR2200056615, registered on February 9, 2022, http://www.chictr.org.cn; Ethics Committee of People’s Hospital of Zhongjiang County, no: JLS-2021-034, approved at May 10, 2021, and no: JLS-2022-027, approved at May 30, 2022). Results Among the main outcome measures, the heparin group showed a significant increase in APTT compared to the sodium citrate group at 10 min after locking (LSMD = 8.15, 95%Cl 7.1 to 9.2, P < 0.001). Among the secondary outcome measures, the heparin group demonstrated a significant increase in prothrombin time (PT) compared to the sodium citrate group at 10 minutes after locking (LSMD = 0.86, 95%CI 0.12 to 1.61, P = 0.024). It is found that APTT (LSMD = 8.05, 95%CI 6.71 to 9.4, P < 0.001), PT (LSMD = 0.78, 95%CI 0.14 to 1.42, P = 0.017) and fibrinogen (FB) (LSMD = 1.15, 95%CI 0.23 to 2.08, P = 0.014) at 7 d after locking are increased in the heparin group compared to sodium citrate group. There was no significant difference in catheter indwelling time between the two groups (P = 0.456). The incidence of catheter blockage was lower in sodium citrate group (RR = 0.36, 95%CI 0.15 to 0.87, P = 0.024). No CRBSI occurred in the two groups. Among the safety evaluation indexes, the incidence of bleeding around the puncture site and subcutaneous hematoma was lower in sodium citrate group (RR = 0.1, 95%CI 0.01 to 0.77, P = 0.027). There was no significant difference in the incidence of calcium ion < 1.0 mmol/L between the two groups (P = 0.333). Conclusions In ICU patients using CVCs (excluding dialysis catheters) infusion, employing 4% sodium citrate as a locking liquid can reduce the risk of bleeding and catheter occlusion without any hypocalcemia.

Project description:ObjectivesWe aimed to compare the success rates and other catheter-related parameters between peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) and non-tunnelled ultrasound-guided central venous catheters (USG-CVCs) including femoral, jugular, brachiocephalic and subclavian lines.DesignThis was a retrospective observational study.SettingThe study was performed in a level III neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) in Qatar, as a single-site study.ParticipantsThis study included 1333 neonates who required CVC insertion in the NICU from January 2016 to December 2018. Of those, we had 1264 PICCs and 69 non-tunnelled USG-CVCs.Outcome measuresThe success rate and other catheter-related complications in the two groups.ResultsThe overall success rate was 88.4% in the USG-CVCs (61/69) compared with 90% in the PICCs (1137/1264) group (p=0.68). However, the first prick success rate was 69.4% in USG-CVCs (43/69) compared with 63.6% in the PICCs (796/1264) group. Leaking and central line-associated blood stream infection (CLABSI) were significantly higher in the USG-CVC group compared with the PICC group (leaking 16.4% vs 2.3%, p=0.0001) (CLABSI 8.2% vs 3.1%, p=0.03). CLABSI rates in the PICC group were 1.75 per 1000 catheter days in 2016 and 3.3 in 2017 compared with 6.91 in 2016 (p=0.0001) and 14.32 in 2017 (p=0.0001) for the USG-CVCs. USG-CVCs had to be removed due to catheter-related complications in 52.5% of the cases compared with 29.9% in PICCs, p=0.001. In 2018, we did not have any non-tunnelled USG-CVCs insertions in our NICU.ConclusionsThe overall complication rate, CLABSI and leaking are significantly higher in non-tunnelled USG-CVCs compared with the PICCs. However, randomised controlled trials with larger sample sizes are desired. Proper central venous device selection and timing, early PICC insertion and early removal approach, dedicated vascular access team development, proper central venous line maintenance, central line simulation workshops and US-guided insertions are crucial elements for patient safety in NICU.

Dataset Information

Usefulness of Midline Catheters versus Peripheral Venous Catheters in an Inpatient Unit: A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial.

Publications

Usefulness of Midline Catheters versus Peripheral Venous Catheters in an Inpatient Unit: A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets